Suchergebnisse

We review, integrate, and extend existing research on the effects of governments on organization and management. The literature that addresses the ways in which governing ideology, government capability and corruption influence independent organizations' forms, strategies, and their participants' behavior is widely scattered literature in organization theory, strategy, organizational behavior, economics, sociology and political science. This integration suggests a number of new theoretical propositions, suggesting several avenues of potentially profitable empirical research addressing the neglected influence of government on corporate strategies of government capture, entrepreneurial behavior, organizational growth and size, innovation, and managerial and employee organizational behavior. We illustrate its usefulness with an application to the role of organizations in national wealth generation and dispersion.

Many employees in the world are evaluated and rewarded at work based on who they are ("particularism") rather than based on impersonal judgments of their performance ("universalis"). Yet the field of organizational behavior has been virtually silent on how employees react to workplaces dominated by particularism. In an effort to understand the role of particularistic organizational practices, several ideas from comparative institutions theories are applied to questions of organizational behavior, and the model is tested in samples of large manufacturing and service organizations in the United States and Hungary. It was found that employees in a modernist political system (United States) did echo social scientists' claims by reporting that their employers' personnel practices were comparatively more universalistic than those in organizations operating in a neotraditional polity (Hungary). This perception of differences in personnel practices mediated the relationship between political system and employees' trust in one another, their perceptions of coworker shirking, and their organizational commitment.

Procedural justice is placed within a larger theoretical context developed from theories of comparative institutions. In a sample of Lithuanian and American electronics companies it was found that: (a) Employees in the "neotraditional" political economy perceived their organizations as less meritocratic than did their peers in the "modern" political economy. (b) The relationship between political economy and employee perceptions of procedural justice was mediated by the organizations' use of meritocratic practices. (c) Procedural justice was associated with employee organizational commitment and coworker trust, controlling for political economy.

"There is a strong movement today in management to encourage management practices based on research evidence. Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior is based on timeless principles, built upon strong science, and these principles can be directly translated into actionable knowledge for application in organizations. It is easy for readers to digest, retain and apply principles, as opposed to thousands of factoids that are forgotten soon after regurgitating them for an exam. This book will be co-authored by foremost experts of the topics. Moreover, because the authors of the chapters of this book will be the experts at the forefront of the science of each of the principles, readers are likely to find great practical value in this book"--

A merit pay pool consists of individuals who are grouped together for the purpose of making merit pay computations. This paper investigates the consequences of variations in merit-pay-pool design and management for the linkage between performance and pay.

Abstract
Leadership of public universities has come under fire—from scandals, from funding, from students, from every direction. Top‐down leadership of institutions of higher education has been described as a "disease." Shared governance—a mechanism of faculty representation in the leadership and decision‐making processes—a seeming alternative, has been described as "a recipe for paralysis." In this article, the authors proffer shared leadership as a potential elixir for leading public institutions of higher learning, unleashing creative potential, focusing on pressing strategic imperatives, and enabling sustainable systems that leverage true talent to maximum effect. It is time to move beyond the moribund myth of top‐down heroic leadership and beyond the bureaucratic, political quagmire of the current state of affairs in shared governance. Is shared leadership the answer?